AMD Launches 12 Desktop Renoir Ryzen 4000G Series APUs: But You Can't Buy Them - <AUTHOR> https://www.anandtech.com/show/15921/amd-launches-12-desktop-renoir-ryzen-4000g-series-apus-but-you-cant-buy-them <comment><USER2> I just got a Lenovo V14 Ryzen 5 4500U laotop yesterday and this thing is amazing. It benchmarks almost as high as my Ryzen 5 1600 desktop PC, but it feels so much faster in actual everyday use.

To those who scoff at repurposed laptop parts being used in desktop systems, I don't think that's going to be an issue here because these 4000 series APUs have outstanding performance.

I'm not an Intel fan and have a tendency to root for the underdog so I may have an inherent bias here. The fact that Intel not only has competition, but has in alot of arenas been bested by AMD should only mean good things for the health of the overall market.

<comment><USER3> I've got an X13 AMD with the 4750U and 32GB of RAM and it just dramatically outperforms anything else I've used. It's crazy. I bought it because I wanted a step-up from Intel CPUs that was worthwhile from a 7th gen i5, and this is over 5 times as fast and feels like it.

<comment><USER4> This causes me pain. I really, really want an AMD Thinkpad, but NONE of them has a 2k or 4k display. I tested the FHD ones and I just can't bare it/feel alright dropping 1.3k€ on FHD in 2020. No sure what to do now :(

<comment><USER5> The IdeaPad S540-13ARE is spec'ed with a 2560x1600 screen: [https://psref.lenovo.com/Product/IdeaPad/IdeaPad_S54013ARE](https://psref.lenovo.com/Product/IdeaPad/IdeaPad_S54013ARE)

But seems very hard to find a place that actually sells it around here (Norway).

<comment><USER4> Yeah, but IdeaPad is not ThinkPad... I would only do education offers and the non ThinkPads don't come with 3 years of onsite premium support. The IdeaPad does come edu discounted tho.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wonder what PC Engines will do to replace AMD's Jaguar APU/SoC. All of AMD's new SoCs seem to be too hot for passive cooling, at least without huge fins.

I can't find the link, but there were recent discussions (by Red Hat? GCC? clang?) about changing the default minimum supported ISA. There were several proposals, IIRC, with Jaguar right in the middle of the proffered choices, and possibly the best choice for now. But I imagine if that discussion were to happen 2 or 3 years down the road, even Jaguar might not make the cut.

At the low end of TDP, Intel still reigns supreme. But their Atom lineup makes far too many compromises, excluding various ISA extensions to price differentiate. And Soekris got burned with their net6501 and defective Atom chips, so I imagine Intel isn't that great a partner for small companies. (I doubt AMD is, either, given the firmware pain people have, but at least their products work.)

<comment><USER7> There is a delightful market of very small fanless boxes on AliExpress that typically just throws a 15W laptop CPU into an aluminum case. Turns out if you slap a couple pounds of aluminum onto the CPU, it will stay pretty cool. I have a small box with an i5-5200U (15W part) that includes two NICs. This runs as my router and firewal at home. It sits around 40C. It might throttle if I ran heavy workloads on it, but it's great as a small always-on PC.

Here's a search to get you started, and you can refine from there: [https://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=S...](https://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=SB_20200721073945&SearchText=fanless+mini+computer)

<comment><USER6> That's the competition that ultimately ate Soekris' market--they never could recover after the net6501 debacle, and maybe would have exited regardless.

But what Soekris offered and PC Engines still offers is ostensibly greater consistency and reliability, a better firmware story, and a proven commitment to long term availability and support of the platform. PC Engines still sells their ALIX model, and Soekris Europe still has net5501 boards in stock. The ALIX and net5501 are both ~15 years old, I think.

A substantial portion, if not most of PC Engines' business, comes from small vendors building custom embedded solutions, such as WiFi base stations. The developer/hobbyist community loves PC Engines because it takes the guesswork out of things. The hardware will always be well supported by FOSS--because of PC Engines' efforts, and because there are plenty of FreeBSD, Linux, OpenBSD, etc developers with a box--and there's solid brand recognition regarding quality. (Also, serial!) The downside is that the specs are antiquated almost from day 1, but for basic chores still adequate.

<comment><USER7> I hear you on the reliability of a known and long-tenured vendor.

I got one of the AliExpress ones, because I wasn't originally certain what it would be used for. At one point it was my primary PC, and it performed silently and as well as or better than a same-specced laptop.

The support is nonexistent, but compatibility is pretty good. These mini PCs are just taking generic laptop motherboard and CPU assemblies (probably the same you'd find in a Clevo or similar ODM machine). I wouldn't use one for something mission critical, but it worked great as a silent desktop and it has been a (super overpowered) router box as well.

<comment><USER8> Do you use pfSense as a router, or something else?

I am on the fence of not buying Mikrotik or Ubiquiti and just get one of these boxes you mentioned. But I am not a network admin and have no clue about network protocols (yet).

My main idea is to return to Android but have very strict blacklists on my router machine so as to preserve privacy the best I can. And while Mikrotik routers can import various blacklists -- and even auto-update them! -- I am still not 100% sure about it and I wonder if I should take the leap to a small pfSense box that I control completely.

Do you have any opinion on this?

<comment><USER7> I run the latest OpenBSD stable and several utilities for myself.

The router and firewall is composed of just standard PF and a config I've built myself based on the networking FAQ.

I also have a bastion host for my home LAN, local DNS caching, a syncthing server, and some useful cron jobs. My goal is to also use it for a home automation hub, but all of those projects are in the future.

<comment><USER8> Thank you. Do you have observations on how easy it is to add a WiFi access point to a pfSense box? I've read some obscure posts on Reddit claiming that it's a hassle and that's the main that scares me.

<comment><USER7> I've never used pfSense, so couldn't tell you.

If you are referring to adding a wireless NIC to the pfSense machine and having that box be a combination router/firewall/AP, the hardware side is easy. Wireless NICs are trivial to install - just plug in and run an antenna somewhere useful.

From a software side, it's really easy to configure an AP in OpenBSD - just a quick ifconfig. I have no clue if pfSense supports this sort of config through their management interface. I would assume yes, because it seems basic.

If, on the other hand, you are talking about having a discrete AP as a different piece of hardware on your network, this is also straightforward. I have both a DD-WRT flashed Trendnet router/AP acting as a non-routing AP and some Ubiquiti APs on my network.

Ubiquiti stuff is trivial - just plug it in and configure through their management interface.

The DD-WRT was a bit more work, because it wants to be a router by default. It's easy enough to turn off its router and just run as an ethernet switch + wireless bridge. I had to do some searching for a guide that indicated the right settings, but it was easy enough once I knew what needed to change.

All of my home networking setup was my education in networking. I did this with no significant experience prior, except some high level theoretical knowledge, and having messed around in a consumer router/AP's settings before.

Honestly, I'd say just give it a try. Don't be afraid to do some searching and some trial and error. And if it doesn't work out, return the stuff and buy the full gamut from a vendor that sells networking gear with a good interface. I like Ubiquiti equipment from my personal experience with it, but I haven't used other vendors to give you any comparison.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> They said they're going to be doing something for retail consumers soon.

Their standard desktop CPUs are flying off the shelves.

I imagine there's only so much capacity for chip building.

<comment><USER10> The main reason is simply market share - the DYI APU market is very small compared to the system builder market.

So if 80% of their APUs end up in prebuilt systems anyway, it makes sense for them to focus on that market.

<comment><USER11> Nothing that I do requires a discrete GPU. I want an integrated GPU that can drive a 4k screen without input lag at 60fps.

It kills me that there are no good AMD offerings.

<comment><USER12> So the 4000G series should be great for you, right?

<comment><USER11> Yup. Kind of bummed to see that it is mostly for OEMs though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Some will be available for individual purchases in some markets[0] if you absolutely must have them:

Launches 8/8 11:00(JST)

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G ¥39,980($413 w/tax)

Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G ¥26,980($279, same)

Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G ¥19,980($207, same)

JPY prices are MSRP before tax(10%) [0]: [https://www.gdm.or.jp/pressrelease/2020/0721/356407](https://www.gdm.or.jp/pressrelease/2020/0721/356407)

</comment><comment><USER14> > The AMD Accelerated Processing Unit (APU), formerly known as Fusion, is the > marketing term for a series of 64-bit microprocessors from Advanced Micro > Devices (AMD), designed to act as a central processing unit (CPU) and > graphics processing unit (GPU) on a single die

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Accelerated_Processing_Uni...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Accelerated_Processing_Unit)

</comment><comment><USER15> EU ( [https://www.centralpoint.nl/](https://www.centralpoint.nl/) prices )

\- AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G - 4.0GHz (Tray) - 151,- EUR

\- AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G - 4.0GHz (MPK) - 194,- EUR

\- AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G - 4.2GHz (Tray) - 214,- EUR

\- AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G - 4.2GHz (MPK) - 276,- EUR

\- AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G - 4.4GHz (Tray) - 313,- EUR [1]

\- AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G - 4.4GHz (MPK) - 405,- EUR [1]

\</comment><comment>-----

[1]

[https://www.centralpoint.nl/zoeken/amd%2520ryzen%25207%2520p...](https://www.centralpoint.nl/zoeken/amd%2520ryzen%25207%2520pro%25204750g/)

</comment><comment><USER16> It's a bit funny that one of the problems these APUs have is that the gpu power is linked to the cpu power. The 4700G has more Vega CUs than the 4300G, which really is a pity for gamers that are interested in an APU to get a cheap gaming capable system, and unnecessary for those that want a strong processor with just some integrated graphics and would be just fine with the weaker graphics module. It would be nice if you could separate the processor and the graphics part and just mix them as needed... ;)

</comment><comment><USER17> Anyone know a good workstation story for AMD? I'd really like to have a development workstation with an EPYC CPU (like the 7302P) and a motherboard that actually supports ECC, DDR4-3200, and PCIe 4.0. All I can find are not- yet-launched products like the Supermicro H12 mobo. Whitebox system integrators are shipping older Zen-compatible mobos that don't have PCIe 4 and 3200MHz memory, and there don't seem to be any OEMs in the game (Dell, HP, Lenovo are all Intel-only).

<comment><USER18> Do you need RDIMM/LRDIMM or would ECC UDIMM suffice? If the latter, have you considered a Ryzen 3950X or a Threadripper 3960X? There are plenty of X570/TRX40 motherboards that properly support ECC UDIMM (but there are also some that don't).

If you need RDIMM/LRDIMM the only current AMD alternative to EPYC is the recently announced Threadripper Pro. Launch partner is Lenovo with the ThinkStation P620 where you can get 12-64 cores with up to 1 TB of RAM. Expected to be available in September.

<comment><USER17> I don't need a ton of memory so whatever DIMMs are electrically compatible with the CPU will do the job (I imagine that 8 DIMMs of 8GB each is common?). I want it as a development platform for this PCIe 4 peripheral, so that's a hard requirement, and I would like if it resembles a production server as much as possible, so 8 channels at 3200MHz is desirable.

<comment><USER18> TRX40 with a Threadripper 3960X supports PCIe 4.0 (64 CPU lanes) and 8x ECC UDIMM. This would be a quad channel configuration (2 DIMMs per channel), not 8 channels and DDR4-3200 ECC UDIMM may be hard to find at retail. Threadripper is based on the same silicon as EPYC, though, so it may be close enough for your purpose. ASRock TRX40 Taichi, ASUS Prime TRX40-Pro or maybe ASRock Rack TRX40D8 could be a suitable motherboard.

Threadripper Pro will be even closer to EPYC with 8 memory channels, 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes and RDIMM/LRDIMM support. However, you'd have to wait until September and the Lenovo ThinkStation P620 may be the only choice at time of launch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> _AMD states that the initial release of Ryzen 4000G hardware is for OEMs like Dell and HP only for their pre-built systems._

They did something similar with the 4xxxHS series for laptops - Asus has exclusivity over those for the time being.

</comment><comment><USER20> Anyone have an idea if these could possibly have enough power for a media PC? I'm looking to handle at least 2 1080p transcodes via Jellyfin/Plex. My current plan was to get an old PC and toss an old graphics card in it, but these could be a great alternative.

<comment><USER21> It's possible, but you'd be better off spending the $50 on a true GPU in almost all situations and using it in lieu of the onboard graphics. Just from a lifespan perspective on the CPU, better to offload that work and not pin the CPU for hours while you're watching movies :)

<comment><USER22> The CPU lifespan should not be depleted by using the built-in GPU or running 100% for extended periods.

<comment><USER23> Nobody i have ever met has ever hit the lifespan limits of their CPU before that CPU was hopelessly outdated. CPUs just do not break, motherboard / RAM / powersupply etc. Will always die before

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Eagerly awaiting a mini PC with these chips. Hope DELL/HP come up with an option soon.

<comment><USER25> You can already build a computer that is basically the size of a miniITX motherboard by buying a $50 case, an external AC/DC power supply of 12v with 10-20 amps and a low profile noctua heat pipe cooler.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> They mean you can't buy without a computer.

<comment><USER27> Actually from the article "Just to be clear, AMD specified OEM and not system integrators (SIs). On our call, AMD clarified that the market for its APUs is skewed very heavily towards the big mass-market prebuilt customers like HP and Dell, rather than custom home builds. The numbers quoted were around 80% of all APU sales end up in these systems, and by working with OEMs only, AMD can also help manage stock levels of the Renoir silicon coming out of the fabs between desktops and notebooks."

<comment><USER28> I could be way off, but I imagine OEM's buy a lot more parts in general than all system integrators combined. If this is the case, it could certainly explain the 80% number but still wouldn't really allow you to draw the conclusion that you should work with OEM's only.

<comment><USER29> They specifically refer to APUs which IIRC means they are referencing only models that include GPU capability.

Perhaps OEMs tend to favour CPU-only Ryzen models paired with other GPUs, except at the low/budget end of the market which I assume the 4000 series is not aimed at, in which case the 80% value is perfectly plausible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> You get the feeling that OEMs aren't really playing fair with AMD. Lenovo is practically hiding their AMD options, pricing them too high without the usual discounts that are always there for the Intel models, then there's inadequate base configs (128gb ssd really for a 1500$ laptop?!), Crappy display options etc.

Just read Asus shutting off the vents on AMD laptop yet identical Intel one doesn't have that problem somehow.

</comment><comment><USER31> I bought an XPS 13 5 or 6 years ago. It is working perfectly after all these years of intense usage. (I wish actually it broke so I had an excuse to buy the newer version.)

Unfortunately, XPS only carry intel. What would be a valid alternative to XPS with a Ryzen CPU?

<comment><USER32> ThinkPad X13 AMD

<comment><USER33> I just looked to price one on their website, and it starts with some absurdly low specs including a 128GB SSD and a horrible 1366x768 TN screen for $1140. This is not acceptable in 2020.

<comment><USER23> Thats downright disrespectfull. Some poor sucker bought that!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I don't know if AMD intended to mock Intel when they named new Athlon Gold and Silver which are on lower end, meanwhile Intel named Xeon Gold & Silver on the higher end.

<comment><USER35> I think it's competing with the Pentium Gold and Silver branding which are more or less in the same budget market.

<comment><USER34> Yeah, I forgot Intel also has Pentium Gold & Silver, IIRC Intel just rebranded Celeron?

<comment><USER36> Celeron still exists somehow. It "reigns" in the ~200 integrated pc area and cheap laptops.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Since the GPU uses the system memory, is there any advantage to using these APUs for machine learning?

GPU RAM is typically under 32GB (more commonly under 11GB) and quite expensive - for the price of a V100 you could buy 1TB of system DDR4 RAM.

I'm guessing there are disadvantages in memory bandwidth, number of GPU cores, overall FLOPS, but was curious if anyone knew how these pros/cons balance out.

<comment><USER38> These machines are limited to 64GB RAM AFAIK, or maybe 32GB.

<comment><USER39> The memory controller should support 4 DIMMs of 32 GB each, but in practice the motherboard implementation may limit to 4 x 16GB. How much can be allocated to the GPU part, no idea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I'm very much interested in building a low power home server with one of these chips, but I'm wondering how I support a large disk array?

I'm not interested in an existing NAS setup. I'd like to do it myself.

<comment><USER39> There is nothing different versus a regular Ryzen 3x00 CPU. If you want many drives and good performance you need to use add-in SATA or SAS controllers instead of the on-board SATA controller that is fairly slow; it is good for one disk at a time, but slow for multiple disk access like a raid-z3 array w. ZFS. In this case the limit is what controller you use (one can find sh LSI SAS controllers at good price and good compatibility; see the Freenas.org forums for more info) and how many.

For the "how many" part the number of available PCIe lanes depends mostly on the chipset, the CPUs have 24 in total - 4 to the chipset, 20 available to use. This is where the difference between B450 and X570, for example, can make a difference. The graphics part of the APU is not relevant for a NAS, but it can be if you also do transcoding or any GPU assisted work.

<comment><USER41> The standard controllers included on my ASUS Pro x370 board show you don't need a add-in controller. It's got 8 ports on the board, and when I do btrfs scrubs the 6 HDDs get 760 MiB/s and the 2 SATA SSDs get 1.05 GiB/s.

The scrubs start at the same time each week so it's pretty obvious the SATA controllers on that motherboard can handle at least 2 GiB/s.

I've honestly _never seen_ a motherboard with SATA-3 6 Gbps controllers so bad that they couldn't handle a full 500 MB/s on every port.

If there is a bottleneck it would be the connection to the board chipset from the CPU. Ryzen and its board support doesn't seem to have any problems here. Especially not if the board and CPU are able to use PCIe 4.0.

<comment><USER39> My B450 board with Ryzen 2700 has only 4 usable SATA ports (if a M.2 drive is connected, the SATA ports 5 and 6 are disabled) and the 4 disk scrub in FreeNAS is fairly slow compared to the sum of the speed of each drive. Heavy FreeNAS users confirmed many times on the forum that the performance of a dedicated controller is visibly (not only benchmark measurable) better than the onboard SATA. I did not test, personally, just pointed to the FreeNAS forums.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Lame. I thought one of these was finally going to replace my 4770K. Guess I'll wait a few more years.</comment>


"How old is the shepherd?" – The problem that shook school mathematics - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@fjmubeen/how-old-is-the-shepherd-the-problem-that-shook-school-mathematics-ad89b565fff#.7wxk6psys <comment><USER2> I don't think it reflects the fragility of the student's mathematical reasoning behaviour so much as their ability to play the meta-game of the test itself. They know they are expected to provide answer, and that they don't know how to reach for it - so they play the odds. I for one have used this technique, exploiting for example the fact that in school, correct answers tended to be round numbers, as an heuristic, for example.

I believe if "insufficient data" was stated as a possible answer (which the student's are not accustomed to), they would state that.

<comment><USER3> Exactly. Students say to themselves, "while questions can be tricky, they are seldom so tricky that no answer is expected. As far as I can recall even for tricky questions, an answer was ascertainable, I must be missing something, this is all I got, so here goes. A remote chance is better than no chance (answer) and at least I tried and didn't give up".

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The obvious way to improve this is to make "insufficient data" a somewhat common answer to problems (others have mentioned this). Despite the apparent flippancy, I think this is a deep change, since despite its simplicity, it forces students to think about the problem solving process itself.

</comment><comment><USER5> I think that, if they were trying to determine this outside the context of "here's a math problem from a teacher-type person", they would realize there's no way to know more easily. But, this still makes an important point, that the way we teach math doesn't look much like how we use it, which raises the question of whether we are really preparing students to use the math they are allegedly learning.

</comment><comment><USER6> > Yesterday 33 boats sailed into the port and 54 boats left it. Yesterday at > noon there were 40 boats in the port. How many boats were yesterday evening > still in the port?

Solvable: solution is a range.

All problems become unsolvable if you allow unknowns to creep in: "I have one apple in two hands. How many apples do I have?" is completely unsolvable unless you make assumptions about absolutely everything.

<comment><USER7> Yes, minimum zero, maximum 73..

I don't know if it's really a bad thing for students to assume that their teachers are not going to mess with them by giving them an unsolveable problem, doesn't that just indicate that they trust their teacher? In the case of real world problems, there may or not be a specific correct answer, and I think students know that on some level. Maybe a better way to ask that question would be, "Suppose you know that there are 125 sheep and 5 dogs in a flock. Your friend Amelia asks you, 'How old is the shepherd?' What would be your response?" That way the hypothetical nature of the question is more obvious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Obligatory link: A Mathematician's Lament

[http://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/LockhartsLament.p...](http://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER9> If you want to know how a student will confront a real problem, you need to create a context where they won't try to outsmart whoever wrote the question.

It's entirely possible to solve a math problem using psychology instead of math, because math problems are made by people. We've all done a horrifying amount of schoolwork, and thus have a pretty good data set in our head from which to extrapolate.

Suppose I tell you that an algebra textbook question includes the numbers 32, 4 and 64 in the problem text. What's the answer? I'd bet most of us would guess 2 or 4.</comment>


Siemens: Sustainability Information 2018 [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.siemens.com/investor/pool/en/investor_relations/siemens_sustainability_information2018.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> Page 22 lists fatalities, including when commuting to work and contractors.</comment>


Building an Optimistic User Interface in React - <AUTHOR> https://blog.bitsrc.io/building-an-optimistic-user-interface-in-react-b943656e75e3 <comment><USER2> > make our UI update immediately in order to reflect user actions, instead of > traditionally waiting for the backend's success response

So, a user on a slow network thinks that the request went through and closes the tab. Boom! You've got yourself the first version of MongoDB on the client side!

<comment><USER3> You can prevent closing a tab.

<comment><USER4> Can you prevent Alt-F4? Can you prevent Windows Update? Can you prevent a power outage?

<comment><USER3> Edge allows to prevent Alt-F4. I guess other sane browsers have the same behavior. Power outage is an extremely rare condition (especially in a world of laptops) so I don't think that it's a problem worth solving. I didn't understand that part about Windows update, it never closed my browser.

<comment><USER5> Wow. What's the justification for this?

<comment><USER6> I'd like to know as well. Preventing users from closing a tab is the kind of user-hostile UX I'd expect from some of the scummier ad networks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is this topic even worthy of an article? Whether the UI reflects user action optimistically is purely dependent on the use case and requirements. The UI should behave in a rational way, for the given use case.

Somethings we use are already optimistic - When you use Jira to drag and drop tasks, the drop event occurs immediately, without waiting for network response.

There is nothing break thru about this pattern.

</comment><comment><USER8> Today my cto and some other old timers were discussing bugs from the early days of the company, and one of the observations was that optimistic updates create pessimistic users. Network hiccups, power outages, closed browsers, server lockups, vpn disconnects, airline-quality wifi, and closed laptops aside, are you going to have your entire validation stack completely mirrored on the server and UI (and db schema)? If any of these places do a little more or a little less error checking than the other, and you optimistically update the UI, well you've just lost your users trust after they lose their data entry work that appeared to succeed before they moved on, but in fact failed at some unexpected layer.

There are a lot of ways that google docs indicate to you that you might lose your data, but unless you have the engineering resources and time to invest into accomodatingg and recovering from every potential failure scenario in a distributed system, it's better to focus on building a transparent product that fails quickly and clearly when something isn't right. Optimistic UI, when done badly, makes users mistrust the data they're presented. Trust is more fundamental to a product's value than how zippy it feels.

</comment><comment><USER9> Optimistic UI is best for inconsequential things that don't matter in consumer apps such as likes, comments, etc.

But dear God please don't use it in Enterprise apps.

<comment><USER10> I feel like any app should implement a pattern like this:

       action -> UI recognition of action -> display API response

For actions that succeed 99% of the time, I think the "UI recognition of action" can be the success state. For actions with higher failure rates, the "UI recognition" should be a spinner or something to show the user that work is being done.

If you've got a project where it's not acceptable to show "success" -> "oops I mean failure", just go with the spinner all the time. But, it makes a huge difference if you respond to a click in < 100ms vs. > 100ms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> > This interaction and updating phase is often asynchronous by nature, as the > app waits for a response from the backend whether to update the data or not. > The update is usually based on the success of the action triggered by the > user.

> An Optimistic User Interface is when a user triggers an action and the UI > updates immediately, even though there may be a request pending.

This is also called "lying to your users"

<comment><USER12> Generally speaking, optimistic updating should have some type of UI to subtly display the network status so the user is aware of what is going on under the hood, but the network activity doesn't block them from performing additional actions. This model brings a whole boatload of complexity to your implementation however, so be prudent with where and how often you apply it.

<comment><USER13> It's often not worth the overhead to develop for small bits like `likes`. For small, 30-50ms requests they're not going to notice anything either way. A brief flash of an icon isn't useful.

<comment><USER5> If we're only talking about operations that are fast, nearly bulletproof, and trivial, then I'm even less sold on the idea.

In the article it describes reverting the state of the component if the action fails, asynchronously. IMO that's much worse than briefly representing a progress state for a few ms.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> With optimistic user interface updates, how are you meant to handle the cases where requests fail?

Doesn't this introduce unnecessary complexity?

<comment><USER15> personally, for things like React, it can actually reduce complexity. There is only 2 states for a components. For example, an upvote button is "checked" or "unchecked". But without this there is "checked", "unchecked", and "inProgress".</comment></comment>


No, Lawyers Should Not Learn to Code - <AUTHOR> https://lawyerist.com/135690/counterpoint-no-lawyers-not-learn-code/ <comment><USER3> This authors arguments were stronger before he brought up Sony. A new degree is significant investment and actually needing one is a good reason to consider another course of action. But Sony's code is crap, their policies were crap and they are assembled by people that couldn't give a crap. Liked many large companies they employed who could be retained not people that probably wanted to be there. It didn't matter that they had degrees, they did too many things fundamentally wrong. They had convoluted change control process that prevented quick fixes to script injection attacks a quick read of a Wikipedia page would have explained this and probably did, but bureaucracy probably demand tickets, a risk assessment and a business justification.

Any coder can succeed or fail with or without a degree, and largely shops don't actually care about your degree. HR might make it hard to hire someone without a degree, but the hiring managers generally gets enough say to interview people who show promise (github profiles, personal recommendation or years of experience). Then upper management wants to treat all coders as interchangeable cogs in an assembly line. Or at least that is how the 3 or 4 Sony size companies I worked for behaved.

All of that adds up to the author confusing credentials for competence. I have met coders with PHDs who could keep a programming job because of their incompetence and High school grads earning 6 figures because they produced results. I have seen more expected opposite as well of course. I see no correlation in skill and certification. That whole thing undermines this whole article.

Perhaps not all lawyers should code, but maybe some lawyers could have skipped school entirely and could pick up coding on the weekend. Instead this author advocates for institutionalizing incompetence and that is exactly how Sony got hacked.

This all ignores the ongoing trend that every job is being automated. Those who program can better adapt to this ever growing wave of automation. He works with legalzoom so he should know how tech can streamline the operation of even lawyers. What this article implies is that things won't get anymore streamlined. What happens when IBM points Watson at all the law books in the world and it produce advice better than 99% of lawyers? I know you need to cross a high bar to actually go to trial but isn't a large chunk of lawyer's money made on advice made well before that point? Wouldn't it be good to be ready for this or whatever tech comes to disrupt law.

<comment><AUTHOR> The Sony thing was a bit jarring. I suppose I wouldn't expect people who hang out on a site called "hacker news" to agree that Sony, Target, and Yahoo set the gold standard for software development ;)

I do think the underlying point, though, is a good one - this is a difficult field, and success eludes people who spend their lives working on it and companies that spend a lot of money hiring them (or at least attempting to).

I like the author's notion that programmers would have a greater role and status in firms: "Coders are not used in law firms the way they are in most businesses. They are seen as tools to get things done, not as an integral and necessary part of law firm operations, let alone management." That I like this is no surprise, seeing as I am a software developer myself. Unfortunately, I don't think the "integral and necessary" part of a firm actually reflects the reality of open offices, scrum, limited autonomy, and short career spans.

Oh one thing - although the author talks about "expert technologists", I don't see anything here about requiring a degree, nor do I agree that the author has advocated for institutionalizing incompetence. I think he's trying to argue that software development is sufficiently complicated that asking lawyers to become programmers is on a par with asking programmers to suddenly become lawyers. I'd say the thesis here is: software is actually very difficult to do well, and the best solution is to integrate programmers into the firm - <USER2> author even advocates doing it at an equity level! Sounds great to me, though honestly I don't really see it happening (like I said, I think the author greatly overestimates the extent to which this occurs outside law firms. Organizations are often very resistant to providing this status and integration to software developers, though some have managed to do this, with success).

<comment><USER3> While I don't disagree that programming can be a difficult and I can see reasons to not want to program, I would even less like to argue with reality. Non-programmers are losing jobs quickly and programmers are gaining them.

Perhaps if enough people left other fields to code it might temporarily lessen pressure on those fields to allow the people who cannot or will not code to stabilize. In the I do not see a a guaranteed for any not making software.

As for the author's implicit assumptions on degrees. He never does state it, he just implies it several times. His first argument that one needs a degree so they can be as good as Sony was only one such assumption.

I have not had good opportunities at stock options yet... I guess I need to get in on the ground floor of something.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> But legal code(law) should be written as strictly as computer code, so that we can detect errors(contradictions, circular logic, etc) automatically, as well as refactor millions of lines of regulations into more concise, spirit of the law, declarations.</comment>


RIP Bookmarklet (1995–2014) - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/making-instapaper/bookmarklets-are-dead-d470d4bbb626 <comment><USER2> Anyone interested in this can take a look at the Bookmarklets context menu WebExtension: [https://github.com/mems/bookmarklets-context- menu](https://github.com/mems/bookmarklets-context-menu)</comment>


BASHing data: Truncated data items - <AUTHOR> https://www.polydesmida.info/BASHing/2018-07-04.html <comment><USER2> Quite a nice cautionary regarding data truncation. I've seen enough data loss due to the data items being placed in unfavourable environments, even when such an issue may not be immediately obvious. Ultimately, it usually happens to all of us at least once, though that doesn't mean we shouldn't avoid it at all costs. Worst case scenario, hope it wasn't the only copy of the data.</comment>


Grow your Instagram account - <AUTHOR> http://swellize.com <comment><USER2> So, if I understand:

This is basically an automation service that monitors hashtags you provide, and impersonates you to automatically like and comment on found posts to draw attention back to your account and hopefully get likes and follows from the activity?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes it is. You don't get banned because the robot works inside Instagram's API daily limits. It's just like a regular person doing likes here and there during the day.

<comment><USER2> But it's not a real person though.. And that does make a difference.

This is a neat idea, but you should double-check the ToS for Instagram.

There is some pretty clear language in there about not using their API to automatically interact with other accounts (including liking & commenting on photos) unless you have an existing business relationship with the accounts you're posting to (not the account you're impersonating).

<comment><AUTHOR> It actually uses screen scrapping as primary resource and the api just to read stuff out. It's the exact same request and interaction as a real person would do with a browser, so no violation of ToS.

<comment><USER3> Instagram's terms of use ([https://help.instagram.com/478745558852511](https://help.instagram.com/478745558852511)) is nowhere near as neutral as your summary of it. For example, it says:

> We prohibit crawling, scraping, caching or otherwise accessing any content > on the Service via automated means, including but not limited to, user > profiles and photos (except as may be the result of standard search engine > protocols or technologies used by a search engine with Instagram's express > consent).</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Actually Unlock Your Door with "OK Google, Open Sesame" - <AUTHOR> http://dheera.net/projects/sesame

<comment><USER2> A similar thing was done with Siri and a garage door a while ago: [http://delian.io/siri-open-the-garage](http://delian.io/siri-open-the-garage)

It's curious that in both cases you actually have to create a special app to enable any custom behavior from your phone. It would be nice if there were a bit more extensibility in these automated assistant/search/whatever thingies.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep this is kind of unfortunate; it's only because Google Now only resolves strings of the form "open {appname}" and doesn't provide a way (that I know of at least) to register arbitrary phrases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> > All we need now is the (trivial) hardware to actually open the door.

Trivial, is it? Perhaps you should be helping out Lockitron.

</comment><comment><USER4> Ok Google. When can I customize your activation phrase like on Moto X?

<comment><AUTHOR> I also wish Google would allow some kind of intent resolution based on, say, regex matching of the voice recognition result. I want to be able to register phrases like "OK Google, turn on the lights" or "OK Google, set the temperature to 25 degrees" and allow my app to handle them (and yes I do actually have all my lights, thermostats, etc. controllable from my phone)

<comment><USER5> My wife's Highlander Hybrid has a remote start, and I would _love_ to be able to say "Ok Google, start the car" [+].

[+] The vehicle has a GSM adapter to allow us to start the car both through an iOS app, and a python script I wrote against their private API.

<comment><USER6> I think Commandr would let you do this [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.RSen.Comma...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.RSen.Commandr)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Sent this around a SMS company I worked for a while back. Cool stuff!</comment>


Go Daddy Sponsoring Super Bowl Sweepstakes - <AUTHOR> http://www.elliotsblog.com/win-a-trip-to-the-super-bowl-courtesy-of-go-daddy-9282

<comment><USER2> GD is definitely trying hard to win over their existing customers aren't they?

<comment><USER3> They do this sort of thing every year. Highly unlikely its directly related.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Quantum Entanglement as Seeded Function - <AUTHOR> Disclaimer: I'm an armchair physicist. I have no background, I just like reading articles.
I was reading an article about quantum mechanics today and was thinking about the particularly "spooky" properties. And I had an interesting idea for a way of looking at entanglement.
A seedable random-number function generates a stream of seemingly random numbers based off of an initial input seed. Even though the numbers are "random" the same seed will always produce the same sequence of numbers.
Entangled quantum particles, to my understanding, are entangled by putting them into the same initial state at the same time. Then, no matter how far apart they are, when the two are observed their possibility spaces collapse to the same (seemingly random) state.
What if the set of quantum possibilities which we think of as random is actually an extremely chaotic, deterministic function, determined only by initial state (not otherwise affected by the outside world). So entanglement is just giving two particles the same "seed".
Does any one know if there's anything clearly flawed with this idea, and/or has this been thought of before? <comment><USER2> The technical term for the seed is "local hidden variable". It's a "local hidden variable" because in your model the particle can have a copy of it, so it doesn't have to communicate with a central authority that has all the "global hidden variables" just before collapsing.

The problem is that in some experiments, your model or any model where that is based in local hidden values gives the wrong result. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem)

This has been measure experimentally, and the results agree with QM and disagree with the local hidden variables predictions.

[Note in the historical part of the article that Einstein liked local hidden variables, so you are not alone.]</comment>


Apple was overtaken by Huawei in global smartphone sales - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/1345496/apple-was-just-overtaken-by-huawei-in-global-smartphone-sales/ <comment><USER2> I bought a Huawei Honor 7x two months ago, and was happy with it until a software update went out that bricked mobile data on my device.

Factory resetting the device doesn't fix it (nor messing with APN settings), so I looked into flashing a ROM onto it to see if that'd do it, only to discover that Huawei has taken down the service which allowed customers to unlock their devices's bootloader. Now you have to contact support and wait for them to email you an unlock code. This is clearly a user hostile move: it makes it harder to load your own software on a device you purchased and, in my case, fix my own device.

I won't be buying from Huawei again.

<comment><USER3> Just to add to your conclusion, I think Apple leads in privacy. I would never buy a Chinese phone just from the fact that the Chinese government has a tremendous oversight and interference with large businesses.

Yes, US has that issue with NSA but at least Apple stands against abuse of data privacy and has a firm ethetical stance to protect consumers data. I don't trust Google for that matter.

Edit: I feel like there is going to be what-about-tism responses. So, before you respond, ask yourself if you can criticize the Chinese government, protest against it and make a change in China. Last time that happened in Tiananmen square, there was massacre. That does not happen in US.

<comment><USER4> Kent State is within living memory, lest we forget.

Tiananmen Square massacre, 1989.

Kent State massacre, 1970.

<comment><USER5> That's quite a raging false equivalency. It's not clear exactly why the National Guard started shooting at Kent State, but there is no credible allegation that anyone ordered the shooting. In the aftermath, a federal commission was convened, and declared the shootings "unjustified" by the threat of violence to the guardsmen. (The protesters _were_ violent--a few days before, they had set the campus ROTC building on fire.) Eight guardsmen, including all the ones believed to be responsible for the deaths, were indicted and tried. They were acquitted due to insufficient evidence of intent. The Supreme Court permitted civil suits against Ohio to go forward (the state ultimately settled). The incident led to the National Guard changing its crowd control policies. Today, Kent State is taught widely in schools and is recognized as a national tragedy.

Now, how many of these things apply to Tiananmen Square?

<comment><USER4> Tiananmen was much bigger and differs in many ways. The scales are not comparable.

Yet Kent State is a simple counter example to the grandparent's claim that political protestors are not massacred in the US.

I'm not sure how much more clear I can be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I recently bought the "Huawei Mate SE 4G LTE" for my parents because they needed a phone upgrade. I thought I was buying a bargain phone at less than $205 USD, and it turns out it actually is really good. Strange how good it is at that price.

<comment><USER7> Strange like the government in China is subsidizing it?

<comment><USER8> More like strange how Apple can charge as much as they do because their brand is targeting the "luxury" market.

<comment><USER9> Apple always did that. It's not entirely vain.

!) they led the pack, their brand has value (stores waiting line) 2) they push the price as high as it can be (cold but smart) 3) their products often have higher level of finish <= this is worth a lot, very often you have lower priced product with almost the same specs.. but a ton of 'almosts' create a shitty product. It's surprisingly costly to push a few percent above the pack.

<comment><USER10> And their profit margin is "only" 20-25%. That's high compared to the rest of the industry, but not ludicrously so.

I think it's a lower margin than luxury watches or clothes, say, where you're mostly paying for the label, and more comparable to something like luxury cars, where they clearly have to invest a lot in design, materials and manufacturing to make a decent product.

(Having said that, a quick google suggests Rolex's margin is only about 30%, so maybe all these businesses are more similar than I realized.)

<comment><USER11> iPhones represent about 15% of global smartphone shipments, but over 90% of profits. Google intended to commoditise smartphones with Android and largely achieved that aim; nobody is making much money from Android handsets. iOS (and the luxury cachet of the brand) gives Apple a moat that allows them to make meaningful profits on their devices.

Apple's operating margin hovers around 22%, but their gross margin on iPhones is well over 50%. A lot of the difference is tax trickery - Apple funnel a large proportion of profits to offshore companies, which doesn't appear on their balance sheet.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_erosion_and_profit_shifti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_erosion_and_profit_shifting)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes- jersey....](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey.html)

<comment><USER12> It is also worth noting Apple rarely subsides its Hardware Product, and I cant record one that ever existed. From Cables, Hobbies, or other smaller gadget they all have nearly the same gross margin. As a matter of fact the pricing structure of Apple's hardware are the easiest part to understand.

Compare to others, Google subsidise Android development with Ads from Search Engine, Huawei cover most of the R&D expense via their Industry leading telecom infrastructure market, Sony has lot of business to cover for their every losing money Mobile handset, Samsung Electronics, has NAND / DRAM and Semi Fab for their bottom line as well as being a group of larger Samsung.

It is not that Apple made lots of money covering the industry 90% of profits, it is that everyone else aren't making money at all. And in the long run, those who cant get enough cash flow will die out. In 2017 the top 5 brand manage 60% of market shares, nearly 10% higher then last year. We are looking at 65% this year, and very likely in a few years time, Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Vivo / OPPO, Xiaomi will cover 80%+ of market.

<comment><USER10> Maybe this isn't what you're talking about, but aren't their storage prices excessively high?

You pay a _lot_ for a 500G or 1TB SSD from Apple, vastly more than competitors. I always assumed their margin was higher on the higher tiers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Isn't this the same company that's barred from providing parts to US government systems - because their hardware has been found with advanced roots?

<comment><USER14> Maybe the NSA found something when they hacked into Huawei's servers.

[https://www.pcworld.com/article/2110960/nsa-hacked-into- serv...](https://www.pcworld.com/article/2110960/nsa-hacked-into-servers-at- huawei-headquarters-reports-say.html)

Does anyone have evidence that Huawei's "hardware has been found with advanced roots" ?

<comment><USER15> > _Does anyone have evidence that Huawei 's "hardware has been found with > advanced roots" ?_

Yes, Huawei's products are known to be compromised [1]. Which shouldn't be surprising, given the founder's PLA roots.

[1] [https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/huawei/](https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/huawei/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It is by number of units sold, not revenue, and with Samsung at first place.

<comment><USER17> About to post dirty words that seemingly get me downvotes dispite HN being a place for discussion...

I find samsung quality medium at best. They charge top of the line prices and have really bright phones and TVs... However their hardware has broken multiple times and their smart TVs are annoying slow for something you pay 1,000 USD for. (my grandpa bought said TV)

Then Apple, oh boy, either Apple has a marketing team that patrols HN or they have rabid fanboys. It is never good for consumers or developers to have proprietary hardware and development kits. I dont understand the relationship between Customer and Apple. Customer constantly gets screwed and they love it. I dont understand it, maybe its a comfort/reliable thing, but in 2018 use- ability seems pretty standard in every phone/app.

Maybe this is true because profit feeds itself, a company gets big and uses that to get bigger. The bigger the margin between revenue and profit, the more successful=more TV ads=more profit.

I find this a very frustrating situation for everyone who has Apple or Samsung products. But it looks like there is no end in sight, and Samsung has a very active Reddit marketing team that will downvote/destroy anything negative.

<comment><USER18> If someone in the US isn't buying Apple or Samsung, what do you suggest they buy?

Your opinion that "it is never good for consumers or developers to have proprietary hardware and development kits" isn't much of an argument, it's just an opinion.

<comment><USER19> Proprietary system make it vastly easier to screw/control consumers.

I recall once owning a Verizon phone where you had to both buy it outright and pay $10 per month to use the gps. Only partners were allowed to make apps so it was impossible for someone to just turn around and make a mapping app for less money.

You can just not provide updates to drivers ensuring that people are stuck buying new devices to use a newer OS.

You can make it increasingly hard to get official parts/services by using non standard parts and controlling access to such.

I don't think its some much an opinion as pretty obvious.

<comment><USER20> _You can just not provide updates to drivers ensuring that people are stuck buying new devices to use a newer OS._

That has nothing to do with being "proprietary"

Apple is releasing OS 12 later this year for the iPhone 5S released in 2012. How many Android phones from 2015 let alone 2012 are still supported by the manufacturer?

To go even further back with proprietary operating systems, my 2009 era Dell laptop is currently running Windows 10.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> They are also making great laptops with the Matebook X Pro. I think we will see a lot of really good tech from them going forward.

All while Apple is putting out laptops that people don't want.

<comment><USER20> According to thier latest quarterly results - at least a few million want them.

<comment><USER22> Apple looks strong because their price per unit i.e. the "stupid" tax they make you pay on all their products is astronomically high. The actual demand and shipping volumes for their laptops has never set any records and the iPhone is sucking air now too. Their current lineup of products is mediocre at best when compared with what other companies are coming up with. Their biggest "innovations" lately are the touch bar (loser), removing useful ports/features that people like/love and dark mode. Really? Apple is the DeLorean of tech.

<comment><USER20> So if millions of people are choosing to spend thier money on Apple products, is it possible that thier opinions and priorities may be different than yours?

BTW, all you have to do is look st their quarterly results and see what their volume of iPhone and iPad sales were year over year to see that neither is "sucking wind".

<comment><USER10> I think it's fair to say the iPad is still relatively weak (relative to the phenomenal success of the iPhone, anyway). Unit sales have been flat for a while and revenue is down 5%.

<comment><USER23> > I think it's fair to say the iPad is still relatively weak (relative to the > phenomenal success of the iPhone, anyway).

By that standard so is _literally_ every consumer product ever created. Take the comparison out of the picture though, and The iPad alone is a solid Fortune 500 company that didn't even exist 9 years ago.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I have Huawei Maimang 5.

Huawei makes somewhat pricey, but boring mid-range products.

They sell so well around the world because they caught on consumer trends that are near invisible to most American marketing people, let alone SV based ones.

They target the rapidly growing global middle class.

<comment><USER25> Huawei is so popular in Europe countries, like France, UK etc

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Not the biggest Apple fan but I've never had a good experience with $200 phones from Aliexpress/Gearbest. I always end up returning them. A lot of the times they come with weird "Android" portal OS's. Meaning you can't really access the play store normally and annoying things like that.

There is mandatory bloatware that you can't remove for services that not many westerners know about. Even the microphone and cameras are usually crappy on these. I switched from using a xiaomi redmi 5 to an old Galaxy S4, and the S4 is so much better. Even though the specs are A LOT lower, the S4 had better Microphone processing, better Camera (although not as many mega pixels), and believe it or not less restrictive bloatware.

I realize all these products are made in China, I just want to tell a cautionary tale. The PRICE is right but I think the manufactures don't really understand QUALITY and CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE the way Apple does.

<comment><USER27> Huawei isn't $200 phones from Ali express. The P20 Pro is a great phone.

<comment><USER28> Even the P20 lite is very impressive

<comment><USER29> Or the Honor 9 lite which BTW also belongs to Huawei. Amazing value for money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> i bought my mom a Huawei Mate SE a couple months ago and she loves it.

I also read that Huawei's new Mate Pro notebook is getting rave reviews, it comes with a 3:2 ratio screen, hate the wide screen format most manufactures use nowadays

</comment><comment><USER31> I read in another article that Apple usually is number one in the holiday quarter.

<comment><USER32> Apple is typically #1 in profit, but Samsung beats them on volume.

This makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Apple puts almost no effort towards building low end phones with thin profit margins. It's a huge market that has to be filled by other vendors.

<comment><USER33> Some crazy stat exists related to this. Something like Apple making less than 15% of global units while reaping some 80% of the global profits related to said units. In this case, I weigh profits as the best manifestation of the company's position and not units produced.

<comment><USER34> In 2016:

> BMO Capital Markets analyst Tim Long estimates that Apple accounted for > 103.6% of smartphone industry operating profits in the third quarter. Its > share is over 100% because other vendors lost money in the business, > resulting in Apple having more smartphone profit than the industry netted > overall. In the year-earlier period, Apple grabbed 90% of smartphone > profits, Long said in a research report Thursday.

[https://www.investors.com/news/technology/click/apple- iphone...](https://www.investors.com/news/technology/click/apple-iphone- grabs-104-of-smartphone-industry-profit-in-q3/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> It's amazing how much Huawei has grown. Here's an article about them from 2017:

[http://knowledge.ckgsb.edu.cn/2017/03/27/china-business- stra...](http://knowledge.ckgsb.edu.cn/2017/03/27/china-business- strategy/huawei-strategy-push-forward/)

they wanted to top the smartphone market, and just over a year later, here they are.

</comment><comment><USER36> What's the software like on the Chinese phones, like Huawei and Xiaomi? Most hardware is similar enough that it doesn't really matter, the software defines the phone experience.

<comment><USER27> I have a P20 Pro. I quite like it and I even came from the pixel. It's mostly stock but with a bunch of useful features added.

I put Nova launcher on it though.

Some people don't like the aggressive power saving though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I love Huawei stuff - mostly their cellular modems, as you can use their voice features on FreeSWITCH thanks to the encoding they support

Lots of great items from Huawei, even if Xiaomi gets most of the press, and Huawei could be more "open"

<comment><USER38> Hey, wasn't aware of that. You mean like? :

[https://freeswitch.org/confluence/display/FREESWITCH/mod_gsm...](https://freeswitch.org/confluence/display/FREESWITCH/mod_gsmopen)

Looks like it's about 20 usd/dongle - if that's with voice that's pretty cheap for setting up a national pop for incoming calls/sms (which are usually free) - for routing to voip.

<comment><USER37> Exactly. Voice and SMS work both.

I love Huawei products, because as you said it is very cheap. The alternatives are several hundreds to get a working gsm pop.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Does anyone know how this will affect the development of 5g?</comment>


New way to packing: uPackingList for IOS - <AUTHOR> http://upackinglist.nixsolutions.mobi/ <comment><AUTHOR> The uPackingList application is designed to turn packing into fast and easy activity for any journey – business trip, vacation, family picnic, fishing, etc.

You can easily create lists of necessary items and control your packing process. Update your packing list whenever you think you need yet another thing to take. You can create and maintain unlimited number of lists and use a built-in items catalogue, which is simply customize for your needs. Beside things, a list can include tasks you need to complete before leaving. This way, your simplify your travel preparation – just check every item you packed and no detail will be lost.</comment>


Vuvuzela: Scalable Private Messaging Resistant to Traffic Analysis [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://sigops.org/sosp/sosp15/current/2015-Monterey/printable/136-hooff.pdf <comment><USER2> "[to hide which] users are participating in each round, all users always perform an exchange"

Resulting in 12 KB/s constant bandwidth usage, with a million users. It does give you an incentive to actually always use it.. I might have misunderstood this but at 20 seconds latency it's not for texting, and also not suitable for large file transfers be.

I like it.. :-)</comment>


RFC 3092 - Etymology of "Foo" (2001) - <AUTHOR> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3092

<comment><USER2> Back in my high school days, when I started my first step towards programming for real as opposed to the stuff I've done with DOS batch files, one of the first books I read was the Camel book (Programming Perl - that's what everybody was using for their CGI scripts back then).

Their use of foo, bar and foobar without explanation was extremely confusing to me and made the whole book very difficult to understand for me as my brain constantly wasted brain cycles on trying to understand these words in the code samples.

Of course it didn't help that back then my English was practically not existent yet.

It's funny how these completely made-up words have become real jargon one has to know when working in this industry, to the point where at least for me personally, not knowing them was a huge barrier to understanding a basic book about our profession

(I might also just have been too young yet. I remember reading the chapter about regexes (littered with foobar) and thinking "nobody in their right mind can find this useful for anything")

</comment><comment><USER3>
        RFC 3092 - Etymology of "Foo" (2001) (ietf.org)

The 2001 in the title really should be 1 April 2001, lest someone thinks this RFC is otherwise notable in some way.

<comment><USER4> Why? It's not a prank.

<comment><USER3>
        Angostura 15 minutes ago | link | parent | flag
        Why? It's not a prank.

I sense that you have a future in marketing [1].

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools'_Day_Request_for_Co...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools'_Day_Request_for_Comments)

<comment><USER5> It depends on your definition of "prank", I guess, but most April Fools RFCs present perfectly accurate, if somewhat bizarre, takes on their subject matter. IP over Avian Carrier and IPv6 over Social Network both were implemented.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> In France we use toto and tata. At least it's easier to see those words as examples. As a teenaegr, learning some languages, I thought using foo & bar was mandatory. Very confusing.

<comment><USER7> "toto" and "tata" may well be easier for you, but I find it easier to see "foo" and "bar" as examples. The point is that _no_ word will be universally seen as an example without meaning, so documents like the one in the link are necessary.

Comments like "xyz is easier" forget that we aren't all the same.

<comment><USER6> It is easier for you now that you know that they are examples. The syllabe repetition in toto and tata make it a little more obvious I think. But you are right we aren't all the same, which was the point of my initial post. Then I managed to pretend we are superior :)

<comment><USER8> But Toto is the name of a band and Tata the name of an industrial complex that produces, among other things, cars.

<comment><USER9> Toto is a fictional dog. Tata is a now famous football manager.

Foobar applies to most of my code.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Many smoke but foo men chew."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_Manchu](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_Manchu)

</comment><comment><USER11> foo /foo/ n. People whom Mr. T pities or otherwise considers distasteful.

<comment><USER12> Actually, it was just Balboa.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to get started with game development? - <AUTHOR> I am decent programmer who always wanted to learn how to develop games, but never actually got to it. Recently I decided to dedicate a bit less on my career and more on stuff I like, thus I want to learn all there is to create a game on my own as a hobby.<p>What are good resources to start this journey? <comment><USER2> I'm a Game Dev with many years experience. My most recent release is Void Bastards.

If you want your game to be look great, and performance is important, I would recommend downloading Unity and working through their large set of tutorials. You'll write your game in C#.

I really like Gotdot for my fun personal projects, but it doesn't have the same full feature set.

You can also check out Unreal, but its a more specialized tool.

<comment><USER3> Why are "we" still writing games in programming languages? It's like if Gone With The Wind was done in stop motion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Learning how to create games with Unity is fun. If you want something more basic with immediate results, RPG maker was always a grand fascination.</comment>


Ask HN: Should I provide salary history after an accepted offer? - <AUTHOR> I've received a written offer from a BigCo that I've accepted, and we've now proceeded to the background check stage.
They've contracted with a third party to perform a background check, and part of the employment verification step requires previous salaries and dates of employment. I have an issue with providing my salary history as I've received large increases last time I switched and this time as well (>40%), and I'm concerned they'll lower my agreed-upon salary after seeing the results of the report (as I seriously doubt it's a binary yes/no from the third-party).
Since I have not previously disclosed my salary history during the interview process, my plan is to bend the rules of allowable characters in the salary field to provide a null value and supply heavily redacted W-2s / paystubs as supporting documentation (in lieu of allowing them to contact my previous employers directly).
I'm wondering--Is this a sound plan? Would you do something different? Am I being overly-cautious with information I perceive to be confidential and irrelevant in my background check given I already have an accepted offer? <comment><USER2> You would supply _supporting documentation_? Why on earth would you do that?

I'd write $1 for previous salaries, let the human figure out that it is obviously an error, and say "That's confidential." when asked, in the unlikely event that was asked. Your new employer is not performing the background check to get permission to hire you. They've already made the decision to hire you. If a blip pops up in the background check, that's going to be HR's minor emergency, not yours.

(Why do employers do background checks? In most cases, so that they never have to say in the future "No, we don't do background checks." Consider the case where an employee embezzles a large amount of money from the firm. One of the first questions they'll be asked by various aggrieved parties is "Did you do minimal due diligence when hiring like background checks?" and if that answer is "No." then _regardless of the contents of the hypothetical background check on that employee_ they're in a bad way.)

Your old employers will generally verify employment in the most minimal manner possible. You'd have to pull teeth to get anything more than dates and titles from a lot of firms; anything more than that a) gets them absolutely nothing to provide and b) exposes them to liability.

 _bend the rules of allowable characters in the salary field to provide a null value_

DO NOT HACK THE WEBSITE OF THE BACKGROUND CHECK COMPANY YES I AM SHOUTING.

<comment><USER3> To expand on this slightly, patio11 (the guy who wrote this comment^^) has written a phenomenal post about hiring that's a must-read: [http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary- negotiation/](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > as I seriously doubt it's a binary yes/no from the third-party

Actually, this is most likely what it is. Checking on employment history, they just need your name really, and the company should be able to say you worked there or not, and the dates. Providing dates is just helpful to match up to your resume. They don't need your salary to be able to verify employment history - I've never heard of this before. The company will say you worked there or not. They may also say if they fired you or you resigned. Anything other than that seems pretty unlikely.

Part of the reason for this is liability. If this happened, and you got paid less all of a sudden (or didn't get the job), you could possibly sue your former employer. I think this is why references these days are not at the company level, but you provide your own references.

I think it's just as likely that you got the job without having to fill out a salary / job history (because you sound smart, and they obviously like you), and this is just them catching up on paperwork. I wouldn't put the salary in, and see if they even bring it up. My bet is they won't.

Also, and this is important, make sure you have their offer in writing with the salary clearly spelled out. If you've already signed a written offer letter, I think it'd be very questionable of them (legally, morally, ethically) to change the terms. Especially before you've started (where they can make up some reason why they don't want to pay you that much).

Congrats on the new job and the pay raise!

<comment><USER5> yes. these background check companies suck. I almost didn't get a job because the company doing the background check couldn't be bothered to get off their ass and deal with a company that went bust in the dot com crash. They just said i was lying rather than actually taking the time to do research and see that the company didn't exist anymore for a good reason.

I documented my BS experience here [http://weblog.masukomi.org/2007/06/22/the- trials-and-tribula...](http://weblog.masukomi.org/2007/06/22/the-trials-and- tribulations-of-employment-verification/)

<comment><USER6> I remember having to provide proof for companies that got acquired or went bust for a background checking company...I ended up giving proof of employment from my tax return, which sucked to have to do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was in a similar situation a couple of years ago with a large company. They wanted 1099's as I had been an independent contractor for years -- I refused to provide any tax info on principle; however, my skill-set is in high demand, and I had other competing offers.

The hiring manager really wanted me, so he argued with HR until they waived the requirement for me. I think it was kind of a pain in the ass for him, so I think it comes down to how much the manager is willing to fight for you.

Edit: I _always_ refuse to allow employers:

      - financial/credit checks

      - drug testing / medical information

      - salary verification

I always explain this to recruiters - I can pass any of these checks, but I think they are immoral; since my skills are in high demand, I try to fight the battle for those who don't have as much negotiation strength. I don't believe that any of this information is relevant for employment, and these types of checks tend to hold back people who are already struggling.

<comment><USER8> > financial/credit checks, drug testing

There are sound reasons for these kinds of checks; you may not entirely agree with them, but they do exist. For certain industries, it is almost mandatory to use them.

They all basically exist as proxies for determining how honest or trustworthy a person is. Can the person being hired be trusted to keep our proprietary information confidential? Can they be trusted not to pawn their laptop? Can they be trusted not to sell company secrets to someone they owe a favor to?

Questions like that can be somewhat answered by the results of such tests. If, for instance, they have a bad credit score, it may mean that they run up high bills on their credit cards, and don't pay off the balance in time, or miss payments. Why would that be, if they are being payed a decent salary? Could they be coerced by someone to lend them money in exchange for say - a list of passwords to some servers? Or a dump of the database?

Drug testing is the same way; if they test positive for an illegal drug, that right there is a huge red flag that says to the employer "this person is in contact with people doing illegal things" \- and again, coercion or extortion are possible here.

Depending on the employer, these proxies may or may not be overkill. As I noted above, you can make valid justifications for them even in a white-collar software engineering role. It should go without saying that for certain roles (financial, medical, heavy equipment) that having a trustworthy employee can mean the difference between "life or death" of the company, liability risks, or injury/death of the employee or fellow employees.

<comment><USER7> >There are sound reasons for these kinds of checks; you may not entirely agree with them, but they do exist.

Well, I understand their reasons, but I dispute that the logic behind this reasoning is sound.

The best overall argument I have ever heard is that for security clearance, a company might want to evaluate how susceptible a candidate would be to blackmail; however, at that level of background check, a candidate would typically be given a chance to explain any issues.

If I were seeking a high security clearance, government role, I think I could understand the justification.

However, this type of invasive background check is frequently used for jobs that have no need for security clearance, in which case it seems like an automated "purity test", which is automatically waived for higher-level hires (e.g. do CEO's have to piss in a cup before being hired?)

Re: Drug Tests -- Easy to beat if you've got the $. I also dispute that drug use is a valid measure of morality. If someone is intoxicated on the job, that should be obvious. I find drug tests particularly hypocritical at companies that have weekly happy hour gatherings, or other job-related consumption of alcohol.

Re: Credit/financial checks -- Likewise, I think this is a poor measure of morality or future performance. Lots of people have had financial trouble; it doesn't mean they're going to steal, or be unable to do their job. Again, if they _are_ stealing, or unable to do their job, they should be fired, regardless of any past credit history.

I think that these checks/tests are inaccurate predictors, and are generally used only in situations where there there is a great power asymmetry between the employer and the employee.

I understand there are exceptions where they might be more justifiable, but in general, I feel they're an invasion of privacy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> New York City just recently passed a law banning salary history inquiries. I hope that other cities and states start following suit. Good coverage of it here:

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/business/dealbook/job- sal...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/business/dealbook/job-salary-pay- women-men-wall-street.html)

 _The idea behind the new law, which was sponsored by the New York City public advocate, Letitia James, is to try to prevent pay inequality between men and women. According to an August 2016 study commissioned by Ms. James, women in New York State get paid, on average, only around 87 percent of what men get paid. Women in New York State earn collectively some $20 billion less annually than do men. In New York City, women get paid nearly $6 billion less than men annually._

 _This inequity gets memorialized not only when a woman starts a job but also when she switches jobs because until now employers were able to ask prospective employees how much they have been paid in the past. The pay inequity gets perpetuated year-to-year, person-to-person across industries._

</comment><comment><USER10> For my last 3 jobs I've entered 0 (or $1 if 0 isn't allowed) as my past salary in online forms and blacked out my SSN, pay, taxes, etc on W2s and pay stubs. I usually just leave my name, date, and the company logo. I've had zero issues. Nobody has ever asked why I blacked it out or what was under there.

<comment><USER8> Curious - how are paid (and taxes taken out) if your employer doesn't know your SSN?

Unless you're a contractor and using a "company" tax ID number, or being paid "under the table" in cash, bitcoin, or other goods...?

<comment><USER11> Just because you do not supply your SSN to a scummy background check company does not mean your employer can't see it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I am not a lawyer.

With that out of the way, you have already completed the negotiation phase of the process. They can't reopen the salary question without rescinding the offer completely. Why would they do that? They've already invested heavily in recruiting you and have offered a salary they must be comfortable with. To squeeze you now would make no sense. If they did that, you wouldn't want to work there anyway.

The third party is certainly some 'bcheck' company that services many clients that do require salary info as part of their negotiation process. They don't have a custom process for BigCo, so you got the generic form everyone gets, regardless of employer. They run a series of standard online checks, maybe call past employers and get only dates and title (no employer gives out salary data when asked), and forward the whole mess to BigCo HR. The bcheck company has no opinion in the matter. I'm guessing the only use for past salary data they might have is to judge how they are doing versus the market.

</comment><comment><USER13> "I'm concerned they'll lower my agreed-upon salary after seeing the results of the report"

Agreed upon is agreed upon. If they really try to lower your salary it's probably not a good place to work.

<comment><USER14> hmm, Is it that binary? What if the OP lied to get higher numbers from the prospective employer.

Usually, most employers do ask for your existing pay slip/old W2 along with your accepted signed offer letter to ensure due diligence.

<comment><USER13> I have seen plenty of times where employers lied about average salaries in the company and told new hires that they are in the upper range at the company. I find it crazy that somehow employees have to be fully transparent but companies can lie and hide information as much as they want.

They should do their due diligence before hiring somebody.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I would enter $1, as mentioned elsewhere.

"I noticed you entered $1 here. Can you please correct with your actual salary?"

Answers: "No"

"I'm sorry, but I do not share previous salary information"

"As a matter of principle, I won't be sharing previous salary information"

"Yes I'm aware that it is required, and I would love to work for BigCo, but I won't be sharing my previous salary information"

"I understand you need to enter salary information, but I do not share that information with any prospective employer. I sincerely hope we can move forward."

Notice that the reasoning for each response is "because I said so" and is not open to prying HR tactics. They will try hard to make you second guess yourself, they may revoke the offer. Stick to your guns, "No salary info. I'd love to work there. Let's move on."

<comment><USER16> You have to be prepared to walk away from the offer though to make this work.

Which makes for some interesting game theory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I fell in to this trap with 'BigCo'. I never gave my salary information to the recruiter, and kept my cards to my chest.

When I tried to negotiate my low-ball offer this docu was brought up, that she had taken a look at my past salary that was provided here. I would not fill this out if I could go back in time. That being said, this was provided prior to the salary offer.

</comment><comment><USER18> Don't get fancy with a null. Just put $0 or $1. If they ask about it say it's confidential. They already made you an offer, it's unlikely they'll do anything at this point. They want you to work there.

<comment><USER19> Most of these sorts of forms I've seen in recent years have been online things that have some kind of input validation. In particular, the ones I've seen tend to be a drop box with choices like $20,000-$29,999...$30,000-$39,999... etc. And the form won't submit without making a choice. The point evidently being to leave no realistic choice but to tell them the truth.

<comment><USER18> Put the lowest or highest amount the drop down says so it still seems unrealistic if possible. They'll probably ask about it, and again your answer is, "That information is confidential, so I just put in the lowest the form would take."

"Okay, but we really do need that information."

"That's between me and my accountant, haha. But based my my research this is the amount people in my field make so let's put this number down. -places print out of Glassdoor salary info on table-"

Ultimately it's just another method to pressure you into giving them more leverage in salary negotiation. You still don't have to give it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > "I'm concerned they'll lower my agreed-upon salary after seeing the results > of the report"

That would be a really easy reason for you to back out and to start out not happy with them. If they did this, I'd consider leaving immediately.

<comment><USER21> Not to mention that this kind of dirt gets around. Employers don't want to be viewed as bad employers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I would be pretty surprised if they decided to reduce their offer after you'd already accepted it.

</comment><comment><USER23> My partner works in HR. If you have given them a salary figure previously and they do this check and find you have lied then they can withdraw their offer.

This is why this check is in with the background check and why you should never give salary history to a potential employer.

Null value FTW.

They will still contact your previous employer but all that they will confirm is whether you worked there, no one will give out your previous salary. And no, I wouldn't give any supporting docs as per patio.

<comment><USER24> > If you have given them a salary figure previously and they do this check and > find you have lied then they can withdraw their offer.

this line should just read,

> they can withdraw their offer.

I'm pretty sure they can withdraw their offer at any time for any reason or no reason at all.

<comment><USER25> Right, in the sense that they don't owe the applicant a reason. But being caught in a lie is an especially good reason, from an internal perspective, to decide to move on from an applicant.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> It is not the BigCo which is asking for the info but the third party. You can refuse to share the information by writing "undisclosed" if it allows for text or just write 0. In case the BigCo wants the salary information let someone from the company contact your directly and discuss it.

</comment><comment><USER27> I also had this happened with BigCo. I left it blank or if required entered $0. Nobody said anything about it.

</comment><comment><USER25> My decision would depend on how hungry I am. It's difficult for me to imagine being in a position where I would disclose previous salary information, at this point in my career. It's irrelevant. I should be paid what I'm worth to this company at the present moment, which has nothing to do with what I may have earned elsewhere.

I personally would not submit the form until I've had a conversation with someone. I'd tell them, in writing, I won't share my salary history, and then ask how I should proceed on the background check form without it. I would not submit a null value without giving them a heads up.

That said, if you really want or need the job, feel free to make an exception.

</comment><comment><USER28> I went through this when I received an offer to join a BigCo.

During the background check provided by the 3rd party, I actually filled in my STARTING, not FINAL salary for some of the previous companies that I worked for.

This actually came up in the final report as mismatches in my history since they actually do call up each company you provide information for, but nothing ever came of it.

I suggest that you not lie on a background check. The company will not renege on an already agreed on salary nor does a BigCo care how much they're paying you.

What they're looking for is honesty and that there are no glaring red flags in your personality or history.

</comment><comment><USER29> Isn't there a way to find your current salary by your future employer? For eg. I am making x$ per year today, could I say I am making 1.5(x) to my future employer and wouldn't he validate/verify it?

<comment><USER30> Only if the future employer asks the current employer for this information, and the current employer agrees to provide it. Both those things are unlikely in the US.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Just put one or zero in the salary field(s). No company worth working for is actually checking your salary history.

Resorting to entering '; DROP TABLE candidates; -- will definitely get your application rejected though.

</comment><comment><USER32> I jist went through this. The company used a firm called HireRight. They wanted to confirm my employment history, and get info on my past salary. I left those fields empty, and redacted salary info from other documents I had to provide them. They also tried to get this info from my past employers, but no one in their right mind would disclose that to a random third party. This hasn't caused any problems for me - turns out they want to hire me more than they want that info.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'd suggest showing your offer letter to a lawyer and discussing it with him/her.

I understand your desire for privacy, and it sucks that BigCo is asking for this person info. But if you didn't lie about previous salaries and they've already offered you a certain amount, I think your risk is lower if you just give them the info.

HR departments can be pretty rigid and unforgiving if you try to deviate from their prescribed processes...

</comment><comment><USER34> Basically they make you fill it, but I think the idea is that the company who'll hire you fill in the salary you claimed you had during the interview and the background check company will check if you didn't lie.

So you can just leave it out, if it's important they'll ask you and you can discuss why you're not confortable sharing it. Anyway it won't cost you the job.

</comment><comment><USER35> No, no and no. Everything is negotiable, and employers don't need to know your previous salaries. They want it as a negotiating tactic only, there is no other legitimate reason to require it. Any company that would bar you from employment for (tactfully) refusing to provide this information is not a place you want to work.

</comment><comment><USER36> For VOE they should just need start and end dates (at least anywhere I have worked) possibly with a heads up from you, but if I accepted an offer that was contingent on passing a background check I would just cooperate as that is just part of what you are signing up for this that type of position.

</comment><comment><USER37> Just lie or if you want to be a stick in the mud put $0 in the field and tell them to buzz off.

If they come back to you with "proof" that you had a lower salary just say that that didn't include your large yearly bonuses and that your previous salary was confidential anyway.

If their background check comes with a much lower salary they'll probably doubt the agency anyway. This information is supposed to be pretty protected and most people are probably just doing the old trick where they pretend to be someone interested in a job at your former company and ask about general compensation there.

<comment><USER22> Don't lie about it. The odds of them withdrawing or changing their offer at this point because of your salary history are lower than the odds they fire you for lying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> You're not supposed to be required to report previous salary. Just give names of previous employers and don't tell lies.

</comment><comment><USER38> Just say $1 and tell them it's confidential. You value your privacy and don't want to reveal this information to them.

</comment><comment><USER39> No, never.

</comment><comment><USER40> no

</comment><comment><USER41> It seems unusual. Can anyone else vouch for this happening to them?</comment>


Can making seawater drinkable quench the world's thirst? - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34478052 <comment><USER2> Sure, but water recycling is even more efficient. You can extract pure, drinkable water from used shower water, or even toilet water, using much less energy than it takes to remove sea salt (since you're fighting a much gentler osmotic gradient).

Psychologically though, I think most people prefer the idea of purified sea water to purified toilet water ... even if the sea is a toilet for everything that lives in it!

<comment><USER3> Would there be any logic in solidifying NaCl for fuels or for burning to drive electric generators?

<comment><USER4> You can't burn NaCl.

<comment><USER5> Fluorine disagrees.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd like to know the impact that the desalination plants in Israel and Saudi Arabia have on the environment, specificially the sea life in the water being sucked into these plants. It's my understanding that the biggest hurdle for desalination in California is not energy but the ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER7> What a silly question. Of course it can.</comment>


Git as a NoSql database (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.kenneth-truyers.net/2016/10/13/git-nosql-database/ <comment><USER2> We were discussing esoteric databases yesterday in the office, and this came up.

The only thing on my mind was: Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.

Disclaimer: We are a bit esoteric as well, we are a GPU based database ([http://www.sqream.com](http://www.sqream.com))</comment>


Chrome extension to post to HN and search a page on HN - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hacker-news-filter/agohmjkdphojdlhkjejgmoicdpnlajam?hl=en-US <comment><USER2> this is cool, I was actually thinking about this yesterday. You might just have saved me a weekend, thanks :)

"Because this testing is happened offline, the server will get unknow for you visiting history for no HN items. Powered by HN 10 years, million items, commits and hackers, your web reading will be more efficient and valuable. Try it, then connect HN community to your web!"

Hope you dont mind some grammar questions and tips :)

The first sentence makes no sense to me, could you clarify?

The second I would say something like: "Powered by 10 years of HN submissions; it has million of pages, and comments. Your web reading will be more efficient and have greater context."

The third I would phrase: "Try it, and enjoy the HN community wherever you go!"</comment>


Show HN: Coronavirus Spread Animation/Map - <AUTHOR> https://coronavirus.dreamonward.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> The goal of this app is to show Coronavirus spread over time. Through all the sensational headlines, I couldn't really see how the virus was developing over the globe. This should give a better feel for both the infection rate and affected areas.

A side goal is to create a responsible interactive virus map. For that I took some notes from the ArcGIS post the other day about responsible mapping. Mainly using a blue color scheme instead of red tints.

For a more detailed motivation as well as design considerations please see the blog post. Or feel free to ask of course.

I hope this is of use to some of you.

* Code: [https://github.com/RRMoelker/corona-time-series-map](https://github.com/RRMoelker/corona-time-series-map)

* Motivation and design considerations post: [https://dreamonward.com/2020/02/28/coronavirus-spread-animat...](https://dreamonward.com/2020/02/28/coronavirus-spread-animation/)

* Data by by JHU CSSE: [https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19](https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19)

</comment><comment><USER2> Wow! This is actually really cool! I wonder why no one finds this interesting like me.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think each post has like a 3 minute window to get going otherwise it's going to end up in the great dusty internet library. I'm surprised you stumbled upon it now.

Just so I can get an understanding how people find stuff on Hackernews, how did you come across it?</comment></comment>


Show HN: Learn How to Build and Launch a Shopify App - <AUTHOR> https://courses.iangrabill.com/how-to-build-a-shopify-app?coupon=PREORDER <comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for checking out my new course! If you have any questions let me know.

</comment><comment><USER2> So you build custom apps for companies on Shopify?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yup, my clients are businesses that want to build some sort of integration with the Shopify platform.

It usually involves an embedded app that lives within the merchant's shopify admin.</comment></comment>


Google is lying to you with their activity controls - <AUTHOR> I use this to stop Google from tracking me https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity , I just did this to see what information Google is gathering on me. https://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout. As it turns out they don't match and Google is lying to us all.
To start I keep my Google Gmail clean and the "All Mail" box continually empty. But turns out Google has kept my email for the last 6 months without my permission. I have already requested that it be deleted thought their online tools and all my mailboxes show empty.
Moving on to browsing history I have all of my Google activity set not to track https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity , going to the site shows no activity. However looking though the logs that Google has sent me from https://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout they have my complete browsing history for the last 12 months.
I am actually sickened by this as I go out of my way to protect my privacy and take all of the steps provided by Google to stop them from tracking everything I do. They are just straight up lying to people, it is disgusting.
If you have any Google account of any kind then the information they have on you could be a treasure trove, the damage someone could do to a public figure with this type of information would be huge. <comment><USER2> That takeout.google link you shared ..... I'm pretty sure that it is used to create an archive of your data. I'm also pretty sure making an archive will store your stuff with google.

</comment><comment> ng-user If you actually did go out of your way to protect your privacy, step 1 would be not to use Gmail.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is true , but I wanted to believe! so wanted to believe Google was making an honest effort for it's customers.</comment></comment>


Passwords are outdated, Patterns are the thing now - <AUTHOR> http://www.stef.be/dev/javascript/patternlock/

<comment><USER2> This is just a cumbersome way to enter a numbers-only password, not a pattern. I can go from 9 to 1 without making an edge between the nodes and it will be translated as "91".

</comment><comment><USER3> No. People have the same problems with patterns as with passwords. Patterns are even more predictable then passwords because a human is lazy and will create an 'easy' pattern.</comment>


The Secret History of Silicon Valley by Steve Blank - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFSPHfZQpIQ

<comment><USER2> Long but fascinating presentation made by Steve Blank at Google Tech Talks in December, 2007. I was a history major as an undergraduate and wanted to be a professor of history. This presentation reminds me why - history can be presented in methodical and detailed fashion but it need not be boring if the person presenting it has a lively sense of the human drama associated with any given era, as Mr. Blank very evidently does.

His particular topic here: the military history of Silicon Valley, by which he opens up a hugely important era in the Valley's history that we scarcely consider today, to wit, the technology developed in and around WWII.

Well worth listening to, even in snippet for those who lack the time to sit through the whole 56 minutes.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've seen this presentation irl (not at Google).

The most fascinating part for me is the progress of radar equipment in just few war years. It's unfortunate that necessity is the hardest driver of innovation, one can only dream what would be achieved if this level of innovation would be sustainable.</comment>